​UK lost ‘national appetite’ for war, says top general

​Britain is suffering from “campaign fatigue” following its experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, compounded by a belief in government that defense is not a vote-winner, according to the former head of the British Army.

General Sir Peter Wall
served as chief of the general staff from 2010 to 2014.

Writing in the Telegraph newspaper, Wall warned that despite
spending a hard decade in Iraq and Afghanistan, Britain should
not expect an easier future. He said the UK should be wary of
being “caught napping.”

Adding his voice to those who have made a priority of opposing
defense cuts recently, Wall sketched the dangers faced by Britain
in the wake of the Arab Spring and the “State-on-state
confrontation in Europe initiated by Russia.”

“The key lessons here are threefold, and they are not new.
First, we are very poor at predicting the future. Second, there
are plenty of potential threats out there. Third, we need
balanced forces to ensure we can protect the UK, its people, and
our interests against the unforeseen,” said Wall.

“Our national appetite for military intervention has been
diminished by the experiences of Iraq and Afghanistan. There is a
sense of campaign fatigue, which is reflected in low political
appetite for the UK to engage to protect our longer-term
interests. This is compounded by a belief that there are no votes
in defense.”

Wall pointed to the rapidly shifting character of international
politics and offered “…a word of caution. Just because we
have had a tough decade it doesn’t mean the future will be kind
to us. When it isn’t, public opinion can turn on a sixpence; not
so defense capability after a period of under-investment.”

The general was writing on the risks posed by deep cuts to the
military. His comments come in a week when Prime Minister David
Cameron faces a Tory rebellion on the issue.

Reductions will be debated on Thursday. A number of politicians
and officers have lambasted the PM over his waning commitment to
spend the symbolic 2 percent of GDP on defense as part of NATO.

Ex-Colonel Bob Stewart MP, who sits on the Defense Select
Committee, last week called for defense chiefs to resign over the
reductions and indicated he may step down from the committee over
the issue.

On Monday, a top UK defense think tank released a report arguing
the government believes strategic threats posed to Britain are
simply not serious enough to merit insulating military spending
from budget cuts.

The paper by the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) centers
on the economics of defense under austerity.

The study’s findings jar with other statements, made in a similar
vein to those of Wall, by politicians and other leading generals
on the dangers faced by the UK.

In February, the top British officer in NATO – General Sir Adrian
Bradshaw – referred to Russia as an “obvious existential
threat to our whole being,” while David Cameron has called
the rise of Islamic State a “mortal threat.”

However their comments appear to be at odds with the RUSI report,
which concludes: “The government is not yet convinced that
strategic security risks are high enough to justify an exemption
for defense from austerity.”